Re: Iterator semantics

2008-09-12 Thread Eric Wilhelm
Hi Larry, # from Larry Wall # on Thursday 11 September 2008 12:13: >So when you put something into a list context, some of the values >will be considered "easy", and some will be considered "hard". >The basic question is whether we treat those the same or differently >from a referential point of

Re: Iterator semantics

2008-09-12 Thread Daniel Ruoso
Qui, 2008-09-11 às 12:13 -0700, Larry Wall escreveu: > And I guess the fundamental underlying constraint is that a list cannot > be considered immutable unless its feeds can be considered immutable, > at least in some kind of idempotent sense. This conflicts with the > whole point of reactive prog

Re: Iterator semantics

2008-09-12 Thread Ashley Winters
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 11:33 AM, Daniel Ruoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In SMOP, I'm probably going to presume that everything needs to be lazy, > then even: > > my @o = grep { /\d+/ } =$*IN; > my @a = (1,2,(3,4,@o)); > my @b = (1,2,(3,4,@a)); Can only one array "have" the iterator? If not,